The Russian Navy under Nicholas II. On the way to Tsushima.

34 356 197
The Russian Navy under Nicholas II. On the way to Tsushima.
Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich in Japan


Of previous article We also remember the strategic mistakes of Alexander III, who abandoned the traditional alliance with Germany and neglected the education and upbringing of his eldest son, Tsarevich Nicholas. He also approved of his marriage to the hysterical Princess Alice of Hesse-Darmstadt, who also carried the gene for hemophilia, a then-incurable disease, and therefore could not bear a healthy heir.



Another problem was the vast number of incompetent members of the imperial family, many of whom aspired to the highest positions. A case in point is Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, who became one of the main culprits in the Khodynka Field tragedy and even earned the nickname "Prince Khodynka."


Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich

Muscovites called the murder of this scandalous sodomite "holy" and said that at the moment of the explosion the Grand Duke "thought it out" for the only time in his life.

Another Grand Duke, Sergei Mikhailovich, oversaw the Russian artilleryHe also received Nicholas II's mistress, the ballerina Matilda Kshesinskaya, who turned out to be a shareholder in the Putilov factory. As a result, all contracts for artillery production went to this factory, which simply couldn't handle the volume of work, and Russia entered World War I with a shortage of field artillery. Meanwhile, the Perm (Motovilikha) factory received no orders at all from 1905 to 1914 and nearly went bankrupt, as did the St. Petersburg Ordnance Factory.


Short-legged and rather plump, Matilda Kshesinskaya liked to call herself the "mistress of the House of Romanov"


Grand Duke Sergei Mikhailovich

"Seven poods of august meat"


And the main boss fleet Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich, nicknamed "Bulldog" by his family, was appointed General-Admiral and "Highest Chief" of the Russian Navy by Alexander III, and the Naval Department. His nickname, best known by the director of the Baltic Shipyard and retired Captain 1st Rank Mikhail Kazi, was "Seven Poods of the Most August Meat." Contemporaries also called him "Prince of Tsushima" and said that the "Seven Poods" "stole more than the Japanese sank."


Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich. Photo from 1891.

Alexei Romanov spent most of his time abroad, and Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich stated:

The mere thought of spending a year away from Paris would have made him resign.

He also wrote:

It's hard to imagine a more limited knowledge of naval affairs than that of this admiral of a powerful nation. The mere mention of modern reforms in the navy brought a pained grimace to his face.

He was openly ironic:

In my brother's (cousin's) life there were always nimble ladies and clumsy ships.

Kolchak claimed that under Alexei Alexandrovich, “the ships built were not those that the fleet needed, but those for which there was enough money.”

The eminent shipbuilder Alexei Krylov wrote that this Grand Duke literally destroyed the defense capability of the Naval Department over the course of 23 years, and Russia never developed a unified fleet: it became the owner of a "collection of different ships."

Given the "outstanding" amorousness of this Grand Duke and his well-known penchant for embezzlement to support his numerous mistresses, there was indeed a catastrophic shortage of funds for the construction of warships, despite a budget that had increased fivefold. It even reached the point where, in an effort to save money, there were instances of armor plates being secured with wooden bushings instead of metal rivets, and on one destroyer, tallow candles were even used for this purpose.

Meanwhile, between 1896 and the outbreak of war, Japan's naval tonnage increased almost three and a half times. At the outbreak of hostilities, the Russian fleet in the Far East had 75 "active combat units" with a total displacement of 192,276 tons, while the Japanese could field approximately 100 "active units" with a total displacement of 260,931 tons. This was despite the fact that the Japanese ships were more modern and had superior gunnery than the Russian ones. Many Japanese sailors had combat experience gained during the recent Sino-Japanese War. It is also worth noting that Japan had well-equipped ports and docks, which facilitated both supply and ship repairs. Partial modernization of the Japanese battleships was carried out even during the repairs to which they were sent after the capture of Port Arthur; in particular, the ammunition load of the main and medium caliber guns was changed and increased, and the fuses were replaced with less sensitive ones.

Finance Minister Sergei Witte also harshly criticized Alexei Alexandrovich. And Valentin Pikul, alluding to the Grand Duke's remarkable embezzlement, called him "the chief pirate of the House of Romanov"—nothing more, nothing less.

One of Alexei Alexandrovich's mistresses was the daughter of a classic Russian writer, the maid of honor Alexandra Zhukovskaya, who even gave birth to his son in 1871. Another well-known passion of Alexei Alexandrovich was the sister of the famous "White General," Zinaida Dmitrievna Skobeleva, the second (morganatic) wife of the Duke of Lichtenberg, Yevgeny Romanovsky, a cousin of "Sempudov." State Secretary Alexander Polovtsov recalled:

Alexei Alexandrovich's only thought is how to slip away from the State Council meeting without breaking the rules and return to Zina's bed. Boredom is etched into his features.


A bejeweled Duchess Zinaida of Leuchtenberg, Countess de Beauharnais, in a caricature by Ivan Vsevolozhsky. Caption: "A beautiful hen breaks the heart."

But the fleet suffered particularly badly from Alexei Alexandrovich's last passion, the French ballerina Elisée Balletta of the Mariinsky Theatre, one of whose necklaces was nicknamed "the Pacific Fleet" even at the imperial court. It was also claimed that the ruby-encrusted red cross Alexei gave her was made with Red Cross funds allocated to aid wounded soldiers.


Elisée Balletta

Things reached the point where, shortly before the fall of Port Arthur, the Grand Duke and Eliza were booed at the theater. Taking advantage of this scandal, officials from the naval department placed a report on Nicholas II's desk detailing a 2 million ruble arrears. In total, this high-society swindler had stolen 30 million rubles. A few weeks after the theater incident, a crowd nearly destroyed the Semipudov Palace; the police barely managed to save the building. Realizing that St. Petersburg was becoming unsafe, Alexei Alexandrovich resigned. Nicholas II then wrote in his diary:

Monday, May 30th. Today, after his report, Uncle Alexei announced that he wishes to leave immediately. Given the gravity of his arguments, I agreed. It's heartbreaking and painful for him, poor thing!

As they say, there are no words, draw your own conclusions.

On June 2, 1905, Alexei Romanov, with the stolen funds and the fatal beauty Eliza, went to Paris, where he died in November 1908.

In general, Alexander III's heir was ill-suited to govern a huge, multinational and multi-confessional country, and his father left him a very problematic legacy.

Naval affairs under the last emperor


Nicholas II ascended the throne on October 20 (November 1), 1894. At this time, the Russian Empire's military expenditures already accounted for more than a quarter of all budget expenditures. The burden was so great that the Russian government proposed holding a peace conference in The Hague in 1899. Among other things, Russian representatives proposed abandoning the increase in the size of the army and navy, freezing military budgets at the current level, and abandoning the new firearms. weapons and new explosives, from aerial bombing, and from the use of submarines. The decisions of this conference, and the second one held in 1907, had no real consequences.

But what was the state of naval affairs at the beginning of the new emperor's reign? We recall that his father handed over to him a completely incompetent commander of the fleet and the Naval Department, the august thief Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich. Furthermore, his father suddenly abandoned the traditional alliance with Germany (Prussia), which had existed since the Napoleonic Wars, forming an alliance with France – the recent aggressor during the Crimean War. And Alexander III considered Germany to be his primary adversary at sea. Under Nicholas II, warships continued to be built to counter Germany: four squadron battleships, two coastal defense battleships, two torpedo cruisers, and two gunboats. However, in July 1894, the Sino-Japanese War began, ending with a Japanese victory in April 1895. And it became clear to everyone that a new, powerful and aggressive state had emerged in the Far East, one that would now have to be reckoned with. However, not everyone understood this: Nicholas II and those under his influence continued to regard the Japanese as underdeveloped "monkeys."

Otsu Incident, Japan


Here we must recall the stupid episode with the semi-parodic assassination attempt on Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich, who was making a round-the-world voyage on the armored cruiser (frigate) "Memory of Azov".


The medium armored cruiser of the first rank "Memory of Azova." During the first Russian revolution (July 20, 1906), sailors revolted against the autocracy on the ship, after which the cruiser was renamed "Dvina."


The office of Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich on board the frigate "Memory of Azov"


The bedroom of Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich on board the frigate "Memory of Azov"


Afternoon rest for the highest officials on the frigate "Memory of Azov"


Nicholas II with a tattoo made in Japan

On April 29 (May 11), 1891, in Otsu, Japanese policeman Tsutsu Sanzo suddenly struck the Tsarevich on the head with a saber, but was unable to inflict any serious injury.


P. Ilyshev, Attack on Tsarevich Nicholas

The most likely cause of the attack is said to be Nikolai's inappropriate and disrespectful behavior at a Buddhist temple, where he entered without removing his shoes. The attacker was subdued by Japanese rickshaw drivers, who subdued him and handed him over to the head of the Russian security.


The Japanese janrikshas who saved the Tsarevich

Ordinary Japanese sent Nicholas around 20 telegrams offering personal apologies for the incident, and the 29th Prince of Satsuma Province, Shimazu Tadayoshi, rode 750 km on horseback in three days to convey this message. Furthermore, there were proposals to rename the city of Otsu, which had been tainted by the assassination attempt on its guest. The ship "Memory of Azov" was literally overflowing with gifts.


Nagasaki. A raft loaded with gifts from the Japanese for Tsarevich Nicholas.


Gifts to Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich on the cruiser Pamyat Azova

Emperor Mutsuhito (Meiji) arrived in Kyoto and, contrary to all protocol, was forced to wait in the antechamber for 30 minutes, after which Nicholas received him from his bed. Another breach of protocol and etiquette was the Emperor and Nicholas's dinner on a Russian warship, effectively on foreign soil. Then the Tsarevich's visit was abruptly cut short, which, of course, left a very unpleasant impression on everyone in Japan.

Tsarevich Nicholas made no outward complaints or demands of Japanese officials, but he retained a lifelong hostility toward the Japanese. The future Russian monarch dismissed any sincere expressions of remorse for what had happened and a desire to atone for his guilt as weakness and cowardice.

But those who quickly entered the world arena stories At first, the Japanese did not want conflict with Russia, offering entirely reasonable and acceptable terms for the division of spheres of influence: they were willing to recognize Russian influence in Manchuria in exchange for non-interference in Korean affairs. However, Nicholas II then fell under the influence of a group of political adventurers who promoted the creation of a so-called "Yellow Russia" and went down in history as the "Bezobrazovtsy." The idea of ​​eastward expansion was also promoted by Pyotr Badmayev—a diplomat, an Actual State Councilor, a teacher of Mongolian at St. Petersburg University, and an expert in Tibetan medicine, who treated aristocrats, ministers, the most prominent representatives of the capital's bohemian elite, as well as Ivan of Kronstadt and Grigory Rasputin.


P. Badmaev in a photograph from 1914.

Badmaev went further than anyone else, as he wanted Mongolia, Tibet, and even China to join Russia.

What was the state of affairs in the Russian Far East? And what was the state of the Pacific Fleet?

The appearance of the Russian fleet in the Pacific Ocean


The official founding date of the Pacific Fleet is considered to be May 10 (21), 1731. On this day, Empress Anna Ioannovna appointed Grigory Pisarev, who had been exiled near Yakutsk, as governor of Okhotsk, ordering him to build a port, warehouses, and a small shipyard where ships would be built to transport "government-owned soft goods (furs) and merchants with their goods" from Kamchatka. In 1812, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky became the main military port on the Pacific Ocean, with a population of about 500 at the time: soldiers, sailors, officials, clergy, and two or three merchants.

Incidentally, the Crimean War, as is known, began on October 4 (16), 1853, but in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky they learned about it only at the end of May 1854 – the news came from the Russian Consul General in the USA.

So, there was supposedly a military port on the Pacific Ocean, but no actual navy yet. The Russian-American Company managed to form something resembling one: in the early 1820s, it had 13 ships at its disposal, ranging in size from 50 to 300 tons.

In 1850, Captain 1st Rank G. I. Nevelskoy founded the Nikolaevsky outpost (Nikolaevsk-on-Amur) without the approval of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Nesselrode petitioned for Nevelskoy's strict punishment, but Nikolay declared:

Once the Russian flag is raised, it must never be lowered.

Finally, on August 25 (September 6), 1852, the Russians landed on the southern coast of Sakhalin.

In the spring of 1854, the development of the Amur began, and in February 1855, the first Russian-Japanese trade treaty was signed in Shimodo.

The Siberian Flotilla was finally formed, comprising a steam frigate, two corvettes, two transports, a screw schooner, one seagoing steamship, and two river steamships in 1858-1859. In 1860, these vessels became the core of the 1st Pacific Squadron, which typically sailed from Nikolaevsk in winter to Kamchatka or even Japan or China. A patrol of warships was organized to combat foreign poachers. That same year, Vladivostok was founded, becoming a new military port and, in 1872, the governor's residence. However, in 1875, the Japanese city of Nagasaki became the main base of the Russian Pacific Fleet. Russian ships were based there from late autumn to early summer, returning to Vladivostok for only a few months.

In May 1879, a private shipping company, the "Voluntary Fleet Society" (Dobroflot), was established to establish connections with the Far East. Privy Councilor K. P. Pobedonostsev was appointed chairman of the board. But even in 1896, Russian ships delivered only 31,5% of the cargo to Vladivostok; the rest was carried by German, Norwegian, British, Japanese, American, and even Danish, Austrian, and Korean vessels.

By the treaty with Japan of April 25 (May 7), 1875, Russia received rights to Sakhalin in exchange for 18 Kuril Islands. This resource-rich island became a penal colony in Tsarist Russia.

The Pacific Fleet during the reign of the last Russian Emperor


And so the reign of Nicholas II arrived. Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich (the new emperor's childhood friend and cousin) and Rear Admiral and Flag Captain N. Lomen (formerly captain of the armored frigate Pamyat Azova, on which Tsarevich Nicholas once sailed to Japan) convinced the monarch to focus his efforts on creating a powerful Pacific Fleet. In December 1897, a seven-year "program for the needs of the Far East" was adopted, which called for the formation of a squadron there of five battleships, six second-rank cruisers, ten third-rank cruisers, two minelayers, and 36 destroyer destroyers. Since the duration of this program was limited to seven years, two shipbuilding programs in 1895 and 1898 were launched. merged into one with a completion date of 1905.

Even under Alexander III, the first serial submarine, built to a design by S. Dzhevetsky, was commissioned. In 1903–1904, the first Russian combat submarine, the Dolphin, was built at the Baltic Shipyard to a design by I. Bubnov, using both a gasoline engine and an electric motor. During the Russo-Japanese War, seven submarines were transported by rail to the Far East, where in 1905 the world's first tactical submarine force was formed. However, until the outbreak of World War I, no one knew how to use these new ships.

Desperate attempts were made to strengthen the Pacific Squadron. In February 1902, the cruiser Varyag arrived in the Far East, and in January of the following year, two cruisers, Novik 456 and Askold, reached Port Arthur. Rear Admiral E. A. Stackelberg's detachment also arrived: the battleships Retvizan and Pobeda, and the cruisers Diana, Pallada, Bogatyr, and Boyarin. In November 1903, the battleship Tsesarevich and the cruiser Bayan arrived in Port Arthur.


The Russian battleship Tsarevich undergoing sea trials in Toulon, 1903.

In total, the Pacific Squadron consisted of seven battleships, four first-rank armored cruisers, five first-rank armored deck cruisers, two second-rank cruisers, six gunboats, twenty-five destroyers, ten torpedo boats, two minelayers, and two minelayers. A battleship, two first-rank cruisers, a second-rank cruiser, seven destroyers, four torpedo boats, and three transports were en route. They did not complete the voyage before the outbreak of war with Japan and, upon reaching Djibouti, were ordered to return.

In the next article we will continue our story.
197 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The comment was deleted.
  2. The comment was deleted.
    1. +3
      8 May 2026 11: 54
      "Russia is governed by the grace of God and the stupidity of the people." smile
    2. +3
      8 May 2026 12: 01
      Quote from: FoBoss_VM
      Although perhaps only through great bloodshed is a new Russia destined to be reborn?
      Who knows, a turbulent time has begun, and if there's much bloodshed, there's plenty of it in Donbas and throughout the entire Northeastern Ukraine, along with ruins and scorched earth. Who will be the "successor" to the Guarantor if it's just a reshuffle, like the drunken Yeltsin (EBN), who already disgraced "democracy" and discredited capitalism itself?
      Russia has no luck with its navy. The USSR had a great navy, but the bourgeoisie stole it all. The "effective managers" turned out to be "cooler" than the incompetent royals.
    3. +7
      8 May 2026 12: 42
      Whatever one may say, there were the fewest of these bastards (embezzlers and incompetents) under Joseph Vissarionovich...
      1. +2
        8 May 2026 18: 46
        You think it didn't happen under Stalin? Corruption, bribery, nepotism, and so on—they always have been and always will be. Look, in China, they shoot people for corruption and bribery—so what? Did they stop stealing?
        1. +5
          8 May 2026 20: 04
          Quote: TermNachTER
          Look, in China, they shoot people for corruption and bribery – so what? Did they stop stealing?

          And they steal much less, and at the very least, they're afraid to show it off. They don't risk showing up to receptions decked out in gold and diamonds, like the infamous deputy Shoigu. Incidentally, the second deputy has already been released under house arrest. It's supposedly his age; one should be lenient toward a close friend of the former minister.

          And to be fair, under Stalin, I don't recall any people's commissars accused of theft. Just like under Mao. There are people working for an idea in this sinful world.
          1. 0
            8 May 2026 20: 38
            They recently posted one of the latest reports about a corrupt Chinese official—I can't remember everything, the list is so long. But judging by the final sum, Timur Ivanov is a snot-nosed kid, compared to a respected man.
            1. +3
              8 May 2026 20: 55
              Quote: TermNachTER
              Recently, they posted one of the latest pieces of information about a Chinese corrupt official - you can't remember everything, the list is very long

              Can I have a link? It only points to
              Bribe-taking: systematic acceptance of money and gifts for assistance in resolving personnel and other issues.

              as well as
              Personnel misconduct: using power to assist others in obtaining "improper advantages" in appointments.

              In total, we're talking about several million USD, which is nothing by Russian standards, that's how much the housing managers steal.
              1. +1
                8 May 2026 21: 31
                No, there's more there. I'll look in "X." I just read and moved on, I didn't think anyone would be interested.
                1. +2
                  8 May 2026 21: 35
                  Z.Y., a stash containing 13,5 tons of gold bars and 23 tons of cash was found in a specially equipped basement of the former mayor's home. Jewelry, antiques, luxury real estate in China and abroad, and a collection of more than ten expensive cars were also seized.
                  According to investigators, the total value of the confiscated assets is approximately $4,3 billion. Law enforcement needed several military trucks to remove the confiscated valuables from Zhang Qi's home.
                  This is what was confiscated, and what remained outside of China?
                  1. +2
                    8 May 2026 23: 42
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    According to the investigation, the total value of the confiscated assets is approximately 4,3 billion US dollars.

                    Yeah, I read that. They do clarify, though, that this Zhang Qi isn't the mayor, but one of the deputy governors of Hainan Province. A resort like Sochi. And Zhang Qi himself is truly a unique individual, breaking all records. It's impressive in terms of how much they can steal, but overall, theft in China is much more modest.
                    1. +2
                      9 May 2026 06: 03
                      China has a long and deep tradition of stealing, no matter how good you are at your job, there will always be an Asian who does it better.
                      1. +1
                        9 May 2026 13: 08
                        Quote: Cartalon
                        China has a long and deep tradition of theft.

                        It's a fact. People are sinful and need to be encouraged to engage in socially beneficial behavior, sometimes through rather harsh means.
            2. +2
              9 May 2026 07: 32
              Quote: TermNachTER
              Recently, they posted one of the latest pieces of information about a Chinese corrupt official.

              It's important to understand that the fight against corruption in China is merely a pretext. In reality, we're talking about a struggle between various factions within the Chinese elite.
              1. +1
                9 May 2026 13: 23
                Quote: Senior Sailor
                It's important to understand that the fight against corruption in China is merely a pretext. In reality, we're talking about a struggle between various factions within the Chinese elite.

                You've turned the issue upside down. There really is a struggle going on between groups dreaming of dismantling China like the USSR and profiting from it, and those trying to save the essence of communism from these thieves.

                You are conveying our situation, where the fight against corruption often resembles a simple redistribution of property.
                1. 0
                  9 May 2026 15: 12
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  You are broadcasting our situation.

                  Do you really think our situation is unique?)))
          2. +4
            9 May 2026 07: 29
            Quote: Saxahorse
            And to be fair, under Stalin, I don’t remember any people’s commissars accused of theft at all.

            Then everyone walked around as saboteurs and enemies of the people.
            Which, in general, is even fair. For what else can you call a person who has tampered with the country's coffers, if not a saboteur? request
            1. +1
              9 May 2026 13: 17
              Quote: Senior Sailor
              Then everyone walked around as saboteurs and enemies of the people.

              Not quite so. Sometimes they stole by the trainload and executed people for it just as mercilessly. Another issue is that ideology limited such people's chances of reaching the top. When ideology faded, tolerance for such a socially destructive phenomenon crept in.
              Remember? "Live yourself and don't interfere with others" (c) Brezhnev's times.

              And yes, China is also going through difficult times in its development right now. The thing is, they continue to fight for the very essence of the idea. That's why they continue to move forward and develop.
          3. +1
            9 May 2026 12: 12
            They steal much less and are at least afraid to show it.

            Absolutely right. China has a long tradition of practically legalized embezzlement. Without harsh measures, officials there would have embezzled the entire budget.
          4. +1
            12 May 2026 08: 31
            Quote: Saxahorse
            I don't remember any people's commissars accused of theft at all.

            There were no people's commissars accused of bribery, but there were plenty of spies.
            As for corruption, the Azerbaijani case of 1948 is quite illustrative.
        2. +4
          8 May 2026 20: 11
          Quote: TermNachTER
          Look, in China, they shoot people for corruption and bribery – so what? Did they stop stealing?

          They steal, but the fleet is being built at a rapid pace and industry and science are on the rise.
          1. 0
            8 May 2026 20: 41
            I'm not talking about where there's more theft and where there's less. I'm talking about the fact that corruption, bribery, and nepotism emerged when the state emerged—that is, a group of people who distribute the surplus product. And these phenomena will disappear when the state disappears. Which won't happen anytime soon.
        3. +4
          8 May 2026 23: 48
          Yes, of course. All of this exists in China, and it existed in the USSR under Stalin. But not in the enormous quantities and volumes we have in Russia.
        4. 0
          9 May 2026 20: 40
          It's all about the acceptable level of tolerance for corruption.
          Compare Singapore with its "zero tolerance" and , the Russian Prime Minister in 2000-2004.
          Moreover, long-term imprisonment and even capital punishment are not necessary; it is enough to remove from the clan, the nest will form itself, as it were, capital acquired through backbreaking labor.
          1. +2
            9 May 2026 21: 07
            And who compiles these tables, graphs, and so on about corruption levels? Singapore, Denmark, the United States, and so on—by what criteria? Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi used insider information—is that corruption or what? In the United States, there's even an official concept: "political appointment." Someone who helped a candidate gain a foothold in the White House is officially rewarded with a "fat job." Notice how no one is embarrassed or justified—it's considered completely normal. And this system exists everywhere. But only in Russia—Putin has given the juiciest cuts to his allies, while the rest of the world is all beauty and splendor.
            1. 0
              10 May 2026 05: 17
              And who compiles these tables, graphs, and other information about the level of corruption?

              There's nothing complicated about this—for example, the ratio of convictions for corruption cases to the population. So, no conviction, no crime.
              1. 0
                10 May 2026 11: 31
                That is, these are very relative figures, since legislation varies from country to country.
        5. 0
          13 May 2026 09: 06
          Well, someone wrote that there were the fewest of them under Comrade Stalin. And that's true! Although, of course, a weak person steals and takes.
          But, as Daniil Koretsky wrote, no matter what sins the NKVD was accused of, no one, not even Solzhenitsyn, accused it of one thing: corruption.
          1. +2
            13 May 2026 12: 17
            Koretsky is a writer, not a historian. And let's say he's a writer with a penchant for science fiction))) like how a KGB general stole a special warhead))) apparently he doesn't know how special warheads are stored and guarded. Solzhenitsyn is a writer with a corresponding penchant; according to him, their value is a pittance. Corruption, bribery, and nepotism have always existed, are, and will always exist; such is human nature. Such shameful cases, including those within the NKVD, have been written about. Do some digging on the internet.
  3. + 11
    8 May 2026 05: 57
    Novik and Askold are not destroyers, but cruisers
    1. Fat
      +5
      8 May 2026 10: 07
      hi Novik and Askold are armored cruisers built in Germany, of the 2nd and 1st ranks, respectively.
      In addition to artillery and torpedo tubes, Novik was also armed with anchor mines.
    2. -3
      8 May 2026 13: 18
      Novik is a real destroyer, the first of its class in Russia.
      1. +6
        8 May 2026 14: 03
        Quote: Illanatol
        Ok, the cruiser Varyag arrived, and in January of the following year the destroyers Novik reached Port Arthur.

        Regarding the events described (the article describes the period before the Russian Revolution), this is quite a cruiser. It was lost in 1904 in Korsakovsk (Sakhalin). The destroyer appeared before the First World War, and it was a completely different ship.
        The author was rightly pointed out his mistake.
      2. +5
        8 May 2026 14: 17
        Quote: Illanatol
        Novik is a real destroyer, the first of its class in Russia.

        Oh wow! And when did the aforementioned destroyer arrive in Port Arthur?
        quote
        In January of the following year, the destroyers Novik 456 and Askold reached Port Arthur
        1. +3
          9 May 2026 01: 01
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          In January of the following year, the destroyers Novik 456 and Askold reached Port Arthur

          Ryzhov is a very good author, but naval affairs are clearly not his thing.
          1. +3
            9 May 2026 07: 28
            Quote: Comrade
            Ryzhov is a very good author.

            The taste and color ...
            Quote: Comrade
            but naval affairs are clearly not his thing

            Unfortunately, not only naval ones.
            P.S. Happy Victory Day!
            1. -3
              9 May 2026 12: 15
              Ryzhov is a very good author.
              To each his own.

              So you, Ivan, are a commentator, a matter of taste. Arrogant and pretentious, poorly capable of self-criticism, and downright rude.
              1. +5
                9 May 2026 14: 34
                Quote: vet
                So you, Ivan, are a commentator, there is no accounting for taste.

                And I'm also charming))
                Quote: vet
                Arrogant and pretentious, not very capable of self-criticism and quite rude.

                Nobody's perfect. request Some people can't stop lying, while others react strongly to it.
            2. +4
              9 May 2026 19: 47
              Quote: Senior Sailor
              P.S. Happy Victory Day!

              Thank you, and happy Victory Day to you too!
      3. +2
        8 May 2026 18: 34
        Novik, the destroyer, arrived later. Different ships...
  4. +8
    8 May 2026 06: 24
    [/quote]Kolchak claimed that under Alexei Alexandrovich, “the ships built were not those that the fleet needed, but those for which there was enough money.”[quote]

    I'll tell you more, in any country at any time, they build those ships for which they have enough money.
    I'm so sick of this black and white thinking.
    1. +8
      8 May 2026 10: 37
      The article is a wretched collection of fairy tales and gossip, a century old. The source cited is Valentin Savvich Pikul, undoubtedly an excellent writer, but not a historian. In reality, the situation was much more complex and multifaceted. For anyone interested, I recommend V.V. Polikarpov's "Shipbuilding under Emperor Nicholas II: Essays on Technological History," which is available free on the websites Miragesvar and Mirknig.su.
    2. +1
      8 May 2026 18: 48
      Even the super-rich in the US can't afford everything at once. Or, more accurately, they're slowly slipping, despite the printing press and cutting-edge technology.
  5. +8
    8 May 2026 06: 50
    ...for the sake of economy, there were cases where armor plates were secured not with metal rivets, but with wooden bushings, and on one of the destroyers, tallow candles were even used for this purpose.
    Hmm, this isn't an article, but rather a relish of cheap gossip from a century ago.
    Please bring Andrey from Chelyabinsk back into the RYAV thread...
    sad
    1. +2
      8 May 2026 08: 27
      Quote: Wildcat
      Please bring Andrey from Chelyabinsk back into the RYAV thread...

      I also hope that he will not ignore this topic. wink
    2. -7
      8 May 2026 08: 39
      Indeed, how is it possible, because for you, the enemies of the USSR, all the rich and noble in the Russian Empire are automatically the “gene pool and the cream of the nation.”
      1. +1
        8 May 2026 09: 07
        Quote: tatra
        Indeed, how is it possible, because for you, the enemies of the USSR, all the rich and noble in the Russian Empire are automatically the “gene pool and the cream of the nation.”

        What was that all about? I respect Andrei Kolobov, of course, but he's not old enough to have lived through the Imperial period.
        1. -12
          8 May 2026 09: 25
          Everything I write about the enemies of the USSR—they've proven themselves. And while Soviet communists praised the great men of the Russian Empire—writers, poets, composers, military leaders—the enemies of the USSR praise the rich and the richest parasites, declaring them "the gene pool and the cream of the nation," and treat the people of the Russian Empire with contempt.
          1. The comment was deleted.
    3. +4
      8 May 2026 10: 39
      I agree with your wishes. Andrey and I don't have the best relationship, but at least he doesn't write nonsense.
    4. 0
      15 May 2026 09: 53
      A case is described
      In 1916, according to official N. M. Saprovsky, on a destroyer that was en route between Kronstadt and St. Petersburg, someone inserted tallow candles into the rivet holes, which is why the ship almost sank.
  6. +4
    8 May 2026 07: 46
    Somehow I can't believe that the General-Admiral stole 30 million in a year...
    1. +3
      8 May 2026 11: 32
      It wasn't over a year, the author was mistaken, and it wasn't just the seven-pood guy who distinguished himself, there was a whole brood of all sorts of admirals there - they also love to eat sweets...
    2. +5
      8 May 2026 12: 59
      Quote: Panin (Michman)
      Somehow I can't believe that the General-Admiral stole 30 million in a year...

      But it sounds sharp...
    3. +7
      8 May 2026 13: 28
      Quote: Panin (Michman)
      Somehow I can't believe that the General-Admiral stole 30 million in a year...

      This is almost the entire expenditure on shipbuilding in the Empire in 1903. belay
      Shipbuilding costs (excluding repairs) according to the state budget (ordinary costs):
      (…)
      1903 - 32 753 880
      © Tsushima
      https://tsushima.su/forums/viewtopic.php?id=8616&ysclid=mowqzyss7y342091330
    4. +1
      8 May 2026 14: 46
      Nobody knows the real amounts. But 30 million is a nice, round number.
  7. -4
    8 May 2026 07: 52
    From the previous article, we recall the strategic mistakes of Alexander III, who abandoned the traditional alliance with Germany and neglected the education and upbringing of his eldest son, Tsarevich Nicholas. Furthermore, he approved of his marriage.
    We remember the strategic victory of Alexander, who concluded a saving cordial alliance against the enraged German beast, he also gave an excellent education to the heir and he did not approve of his marriage with Alexandra - Nicholas went against the will of his father and mother

    At the start of hostilities, the Russian fleet in the Far East had 75 “active combat units” with a total displacement of 192,276 tons, while the Japanese could field about a hundred “active units” with a displacement of 260,931 tons.
    Russia has been in the Far East for 40 years, Japan for thousands of years.
    It was also claimed
    ,
    Hinting
    ,
    told
    is that all? gossip collected?
    In world history, the Japanese did not initially want a conflict with Russia,
    another crazy beast that has captured half of Asia and killed tens of millions - the author is an innocent lamb, yes

    Russian fleet in the Pacific Ocean
    - and not a word about Russia's feat of building a miracle city, a fortress, the port of Vladivostok on the wild coast in just 40 years, about Russia's gigantic success and labor in annexing Primorye in 1860,
    About the titanic, unprecedented in the world, rapid construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway by Nikolai, which saved the region for Russia - you have to be smart to do that.

    Meanwhile, just seven years after Nicholas laid the first wheelbarrow of earth on the Trans-Siberian Railway, the first train from St. Petersburg arrived in Port Arthur. Under Nicholas, the population of the Far East grew fivefold, a result of his policy of resettlement from European Russia.

    All this secured the region for Russia.
    1. +7
      8 May 2026 10: 04
      And Nikolai himself built all of this? Have you ever been to Vladivostok in person, even in winter?
      1. +2
        8 May 2026 11: 23
        Quote: Grencer81
        And Nikolai himself built all of this? Have you ever been to Vladivostok in person, even in winter?

        Are you saying that the development of the Far East in general and the construction of Vladivostok in particular was a mistake?
        1. -3
          8 May 2026 12: 45
          Should I repeat my question? Or can't you read Russian?
          Sorry, your wild fantasies are not for me, but for another category of people.
        2. +1
          8 May 2026 18: 21
          Probably there is a colleague who wanted to say that nothing was done in Vladislav Stok during the tsarist times.
          There were no shipbuilding or repair shops for the Pacific Fleet, no normal port structure, no fortress defense structure.
          The Russian Far East was too far from the Winter Palace...
          And there were no icebreakers there.
          Tsarist Russia did not build icebreakers at its own factories.
          1. +4
            8 May 2026 18: 51
            Yeah, and the Nikolaevsky dock, which housed the largest ships of the Pacific squadron, also didn't exist)))
            1. 0
              8 May 2026 18: 56
              Could repairs to all Pacific Fleet ships have been carried out in Vladivostok?
              Were people there for this?
              Could blacksmiths and other workshops carry out such repairs?
              Was there enough coal (Cardiff)?
              1. +2
                8 May 2026 19: 29
                I spoke of a dock that could accommodate any ships, but I didn't say anything about ship repair shops. Coal could have been brought in—not such a huge problem, if they were truly preparing for war.
                1. 0
                  8 May 2026 19: 31
                  Coal could have been brought in - not such a global problem if they had really prepared for war.

                  Where from?
                  Coal was purchased from Great Britain.
                  Your own coal was more expensive.
                  And the navy didn't like him.
                2. +1
                  8 May 2026 19: 31
                  P.S. And ship repair, at least partially, could have been arranged with the Americans. They had a ship repair yard and dock on Marais Island, which could also accommodate any ship of the 1st Pacific Fleet.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                  2. -1
                    9 May 2026 10: 39
                    P.S....
                    So there is no need to develop our own ship repairmen?
                    Are we going to pay the Yankees?
                    And let your weaklings sow wheat to sell to the German burgher.
    2. 0
      8 May 2026 11: 43
      Russia has been in the Far East for 40 years, Japan for thousands of years.
      - Have you forgotten that before the appearance of the "Black Ships" in the mid-19th century, Japan lived in a feudal era with swords and bows? bully
      1. -1
        8 May 2026 12: 46
        In fact, by the time the Black Ships appeared in the mid-19th century, Japan had more than just bows and swords.
        1. +1
          8 May 2026 13: 09
          And were there many? Rifle, cavalry, artillery military units?
          1. 0
            8 May 2026 15: 31
            There were no military units of the Western type there at that time, but one shouldn’t think that there were no firearms there.
            1. 0
              8 May 2026 18: 23
              The Japanese had matchlock arquebuses, just like in the times of the Spanish tercios.
              Against the flintlock muskets and cast iron cannons of the Europeans.
      2. +8
        8 May 2026 13: 00
        Quote: faiver
        In the mid-19th century, Japan lived in feudal era

        And what about us with our serfdom?
        1. +3
          8 May 2026 13: 08
          And what about us with our serfdom?
          - that's also true......
    3. +1
      8 May 2026 13: 00
      Quote: Olgovich
      We remember the strategic victory of Alexander, who concluded a saving cordial alliance against the enraged German beast

      Don't think that France was the very embodiment of "virtue." Russia had proposed a military alliance with France back in 1817-1821 and a war against Turkey. The French weren't opposed, but Russia would have to enter the war against Prussia, which would have resulted in France's border being drawn along the Rhine River. So, the 1891 treaty offered no redemption for Russia. Everyone wanted their piece of the pie.
      1. 0
        8 May 2026 13: 42
        Quote: 27091965i
        So, there was nothing salutary in the 1891 treaty for Russia. Everyone wanted their "piece of the pie."

        France saved Russia, and Russia saved France - everyone, of course, thought about themselves.
        1. +4
          8 May 2026 14: 44
          Quote: Olgovich
          France saved Russia, and Russia saved France - everyone, of course, thought about themselves.

          It is clear that Russia saved France from war with Germany in 1875, but from whom did France save Russia in 1891?
      2. +5
        8 May 2026 14: 19
        Quote: 27091965i
        It is not worth thinking that France was the very embodiment of "virtue"

        Well, I can't really blame anyone for that)))
  8. +5
    8 May 2026 08: 27
    Why is a military history website publishing a collection of gossip and anecdotes?
    1. -4
      8 May 2026 10: 40
      Because that's what the site is. Its main goal is to smear Russia.
      1. 0
        8 May 2026 12: 47
        Do you think that the imperial family is all of Russia?
        1. +3
          8 May 2026 13: 07
          The imperial family has had no connection with Russia since 1917. Please be more specific.
          1. 0
            8 May 2026 14: 57
            So here we are talking about the imperial family before 1917....
            1. +3
              8 May 2026 16: 05
              This isn't about the entire imperial family; it was far more numerous. And it's not for nothing that they say, "The king is played by his retinue." Nicholas II was surrounded by several court factions, each pursuing its own interests. I don't think any of the members of the imperial family who were later executed by the Bolsheviks wished such an end for themselves or their families. But why did they do all this?
              1. +2
                8 May 2026 16: 06
                P.S. At your leisure, you can read about the squabbles within the imperial family, between the Konstantinovichs, Pavlovichs, and Mikhailovichs.
                1. +1
                  9 May 2026 10: 50
                  It's always like this: in any country there are groups that want to be closer to the trough.
                  1. -1
                    9 May 2026 10: 54
                    So, power in any country, at any time, is structured the same way. Read Mikhail Khazin's "The Book of Power."
  9. -6
    8 May 2026 08: 46
    The Grand Dukes did not hesitate to embezzle from the army and navy, the Red Cross treasury, and the public donation fund for the construction of the Church of the Resurrection, which was being built on the site of Alexander II's assassination. The "Highest Chief" of the Russian Navy, Alexei Alexandrovich, the Tsar's uncle, embezzled millions of rubles from the navy's treasury and the Red Cross.
    A contemporary wrote: “Honest Alexei’s pockets contained several battleships and a couple of million Red Cross coins, and he very cleverly presented the ballerina, who was his lover, with a wonderful red cross made of rubies, and she wore it on the very day when the shortfall of two million became known.”
    The result of the corruption of another, the Inspector General of Artillery, was that “by the beginning of the First World War, the Russian army was left without heavy artillery.”
    According to the laws of the Russian Empire, members of the House of Romanov were above the law and immune from prosecution, no matter what they did…" Looking at the "top brass," officials of all ranks did not hesitate to dip into the treasury. Embezzlement and corruption were plaguing the country.
  10. + 12
    8 May 2026 08: 49
    In January of the following year, the destroyers Novik 456 and Askold reached Port Arthur
    1. +4
      8 May 2026 14: 49
      The illustration simply perfectly confirms the comedy of the situation)))
  11. +4
    8 May 2026 08: 58
    Well, what can I say? We've known the author for a long time, and so has his view of history. So I don't see anything surprising in his collecting all the dirt about Tsar Nicholas II, his relatives, and so on. It's certainly not a very historical approach (in my opinion), but we have what we have. Especially since there are genuine grounds for criticism of Nicholas II and his reign. The other thing is that the author, of course, exaggerates them to the point of indecency.
    But this is again in my subjective opinion.
    Well, just off the top of my head, here are the things that caught my eye the most from the article.
    Russia entered World War I with a shortage of field artillery

    Really? Wasn't the Russian army properly equipped? Or were the guns inferior? Apparently not. The problem lay primarily in a misperception of the nature of the war itself, but that was common to almost all countries in that war. Only Germany was slightly better at anticipating the future and getting ahead in heavy guns.
    And Alexander III considered Germany to be his main adversary at sea.

    Well, there didn't seem to be any others on the horizon))) We don't border France, it's pointless with England, Japan, Sweden and Turkey didn't have navies at that time, it was just a joke.
    But in 1903 alone, this high-society swindler stole 30 million.

    Let's leave the figure aside (the size is still questionable, IMHO), but what's wrong with Nicholas II? Did he actually appoint him to this position? The questions are more likely directed at his father.
    And since the duration of this program was limited to seven years, the two shipbuilding programs of 1895 and 1898 merged into one with a completion date of 1905.

    Well, the program was basically completed on time—an extremely rare occurrence for Russia.
    Of course, developing the Far East was quite challenging—the distance from the mother country and the weakness of logistics took their toll. But overall, it was at the turn of the 20th century that efforts were made to resolve this issue, and considerable effort and resources were devoted to it.
    1. -9
      8 May 2026 09: 01
      How the enemies of the USSR cling to their anti-Soviet myths - how wonderful everything was before the communists.
      1. +6
        8 May 2026 09: 11
        Quote: tatra
        How the enemies of the USSR cling to their anti-Soviet myths - how wonderful everything was before the communists.

        That is, my phrase
        Moreover, there are indeed reasons to criticize Nicholas II and his reign.
        You just ignore)))
        Overall, I'm very pleased to have you on this site. Your comments are always meaningful and logical.
        Well, and at the same time, now I know exactly who is giving me minuses wherever possible))))
        Thank you love
        1. -9
          8 May 2026 09: 21
          The entire history of our country and people is used by the enemies of the USSR as a justification for their seizure of the USSR. They slandered those from whom they took the USSR and created a myth about how wonderful everything was before those from whom they took the USSR. They also eliminated all the facts that were unfavorable to them from the reign of Nicholas II, whom they praised for their own anti-Soviet gains. And they still hope to deceive someone with all this.
        2. +5
          8 May 2026 11: 46
          Your comments are always full of meaning and logical content.
          - laughing lol
      2. +6
        8 May 2026 12: 29
        You see, not all of us think in black and white. And many of us note that there were good and bad times under both the Tsar and the Communists. The achievements of the USSR cannot be ignored, but our people had them before the USSR, too.
        Therefore, if someone talks about the good things that happened under Tsarism, this does not mean that he is an enemy of the USSR.
        However, it will be very difficult for you to understand all this, so I don’t insist.
        1. -10
          8 May 2026 12: 36
          How much longer will the enemies of the USSR lie and be hypocritical? While Soviet communists respected the centuries-long history of their country and praised the great men of pre-revolutionary Russia, the enemies of the USSR have proven they don't care about the centuries-long history of our country and people. They extracted only the reign of the last Russian monarch, falsified it, throwing out all the facts, which, with their hypocritical "philanthropy" and "righteous anger," they presented as the crimes of those from whom they took the USSR, and concocted a delusional and inhumane anti-Soviet myth that under him "Russia fed the whole world," to create yet another one of their pile of anti-Soviet myths.
          1. +7
            8 May 2026 13: 19
            Quote: tatra
            enemies of the USSR

            Ridiculous. It's truly funny to watch the efforts of people trying to denigrate the Soviet era, when Russia became one of the planet's two superpowers. Although, I repeat, there was a lot of negativity in the USSR.
            But it is no less funny to watch the enemies of the tsarist period of Russia absolutizing the USSR
    2. +4
      8 May 2026 12: 51
      And the result? Port Arthur, Tsushima, Sakhalin... And not even a single local victory over those considered "monkeys" in St. Petersburg...
      They are macaques, but we are something else...
      If I'm not mistaken, General Dragomirov...
      1. +1
        8 May 2026 14: 56
        Quote: Grencer81
        And the result? Port Arthur, Tsushima, Sakhalin... And not even a single local victory over those considered "monkeys" in St. Petersburg...

        Dear Vladislav, I ask you to answer me one question: could the Russian army have won at Liaoyang or was our defeat predetermined?
        1. -2
          8 May 2026 15: 26
          If they suffered defeat, then it was clearly predetermined.
          1. +7
            8 May 2026 15: 44
            Quote: Grencer81
            If they suffered defeat, then it was clearly predetermined.

            Well, since we're not dealing with theology here, you're mistaken. It would have been preordained if Tsarist Russia had failed to concentrate the required number of troops and supply them with the necessary supplies. But at the Battle of Liaoyang, the Russian army was well-supplied and achieved a decisive victory. Only Kuropatkin's order, which misjudged the situation, turned that victory into a resounding defeat.
            I am writing this so that you understand that Imperial Russia was not a whipping boy at all, and even Japan’s previous and subsequent victories were extremely difficult for it and were connected primarily with the actions of the commander.
            As for the choice of candidate, the Tsar had compelling reasons for appointing him—he was a distinguished soldier and a decent (and perhaps even excellent) administrator. By the time the mistake was realized, it was too late. But I'm not defending Nicholas II in this regard—Kuropatkin should have been replaced earlier.
            I simply want to say that the poor choice of commander has only an indirect relation to the empire as a whole and speaks more to a crisis in the management system, which was also not fatal.
            And Russia's defeat in the Russian Nuclear War is certainly not tied to the development of artillery in WWI.
            1. +5
              8 May 2026 16: 17
              Quote: Trapper7
              But I am not defending Nicholas II in this regard - Kuropatkin should have been replaced earlier.

              The problem was that there wasn't much to replace him with. Older guys like Dragomirov were no longer much use, and newcomers like Rennenkampf were just barely approaching divisional level.
        2. +2
          8 May 2026 18: 30
          Could the Empire supply its army in the Far East without purchasing concentrates and delivering "rotten bull" (expired canned meat) from the USA to Kuropatkin's army?
          Why were mobilized soldiers (those still serving with Berdan rifles) sent to Kuropatkin's army, and not regular units from the European regions of the Empire?
          Why were cartridges for the "three-line" rifles smoked in the German Empire?

          And you about Liaoliang...
          1. +7
            8 May 2026 19: 03
            Quote: hohol95
            Why were mobilized soldiers (those still serving with Berdan rifles) sent to Kuropatkin's army, and not regular units from the European regions of the Empire?

            For two reasons.
            a) To avoid exposing the Western borders to "Friendly Germany"
            b) To avoid overloading the railway network
            1. +2
              8 May 2026 19: 29
              a) To avoid exposing the Western borders to "Friendly Germany"
              b) To avoid overloading the railway network


              Austria-Hungary was forgotten.

              Then why did they order cartridges from Germany?

              The railway was weak and unsuitable for the massive transfer of people and goods.
              There was probably also a shortage of locomotives and carriages.
              And so "everything was fine."
              1. +5
                9 May 2026 07: 39
                Quote: hohol95
                Austria-Hungary was forgotten.

                Well, yes, it would be more correct to say - the Central Powers.
                Quote: hohol95
                Then why did they order cartridges from Germany?

                Honestly, I've never heard of such a thing. Six-inch shells for the VTE were ordered, that was it (they turned out to be of so-so quality), but as for the cartridges...
                Quote: hohol95
                The railway was weak and unsuitable for the massive transfer of people and goods.

                I think I would have managed it anyway. But it undoubtedly had an impact on the economy.
                Quote: hohol95
                There was probably also a shortage of locomotives and carriages.

                In reality, it was enough?
                Quote: hohol95
                And so "everything was fine."

                I would formulate it this way: - In the Russian Empire, things were never as bad as the conventionally “Reds” say, and as good as the conventionally “Whites” think.
                What's interesting is that the same can be said about the USSR, only the "whites" and "reds" will switch places. lol
                1. +3
                  9 May 2026 08: 02
                  Happy Victory Day, Ivan!
                  Once upon a time, a wise man gave me a formula for knowledge:
                  - Opponents, in addition to outright lies, write the truth about each other. So, in Russia, the people have always been poor: both under the Tsar and under the Bolsheviks. However, an objective assessment of the period is achieved not by emotional criteria, but by analyzing the actual state of affairs at the beginning and end of the period in question:
                  It was - it became.
                  And then - by headings (territory, economic power, military capabilities, welfare, education, science, etc.)
                  Even now, it is possible to fully evaluate the post-Soviet period in Russia, taking into account all the positive and negative that the Forum participants bring here.
                  1. +3
                    9 May 2026 11: 43
                    Quote: Victor Leningradets
                    So in Russia the people have always had a bad time.

                    Alas.
                    Quote: Victor Leningradets
                    Happy Victory Day, Ivan!

                    And you too drinks
                2. +2
                  9 May 2026 08: 10
                  Quote: Senior Sailor
                  I think I would have managed it anyway. But it undoubtedly had an impact on the economy.


                  It would have been impossible to build a hut out of it. A few sabotage incidents on the Trans-Siberian Railway would have brought the entire logistics system to a screeching halt. And the single-track Trans-Siberian Railway certainly wouldn't have been able to cope, even if it had had to supply the navy. But the navy, for the most part, had already sunk to the bottom by then.

                  Well, if we compare the Russian Empire with the USSR in terms of industrial potential and military capabilities, the comparison will definitely not be in favor of Tsarist Russia.
                  The USSR became an exporter of military equipment; the Romanov Empire was critically dependent on imports.
                  1. +2
                    9 May 2026 11: 43
                    Quote: Illanatol
                    Several acts of sabotage on the Trans-Siberian Railway and all logistics were disrupted. would basin.

                    What did you write above?
                    Quote: Illanatol
                    You couldn't build a hut from it.

                    lol
                    1. +1
                      9 May 2026 13: 21
                      In short, one "would" versus another "would." Let's write it down as a 50% probability. That is, significantly different from zero.
                3. +3
                  9 May 2026 09: 02
                  You're absolutely right. The Russian Empire wasn't ideal, but it was a viable, powerful state. Just like the USSR.
                  1. -1
                    9 May 2026 13: 35
                    Quote: Vik_Vik
                    You're absolutely right. The Russian Empire wasn't ideal, but it was a perfectly viable and powerful state.


                    If this were the case, then this Empire would not have fallen so easily.
                    And not from the insidious spies and saboteurs from foreign intelligence agencies, and not even from the efforts of troublemakers-"socialists", but from a conspiracy of the emperor's inner circle.
                    How is it that the empire was destroyed by those who should have defended it the most, since they had the biggest perks?
                    And how can we explain that after Nicholas's abdication, the crown was offered to his relative, who simply rejected it as useless junk, even donning a red bow? So even the Romanovs admitted the empire was a complete failure?
                    And how can one explain that not a single political party or movement that advocated the return of the autocratic monarchy was elected to the Constituent Assembly?
                    In France, after the Great Revolution, royalists remained a significant political force. But what about Russia? In Russia, it wasn't the counterrevolution that fought the revolution; the Great War was fought between two revolutions—a socialist one and a bourgeois-democratic one. So even if the Whites had won, the empire still wouldn't have been restored. In other words, the empire didn't just die; it rotted alive.

                    So no. The Russian Empire under Nicholas II was not a viable, powerful state. It was a zombie state.

                    The USSR largely followed the fate of the Russian Empire, but not in everything. And there are still many supporters of the USSR, unlike the few foolish monarchists who make no public appearances, only eliciting laughter with their online clowning.
                    1. 0
                      9 May 2026 14: 50
                      I wasn't writing about 1917, but about the late 19th and early 20th centuries. When the most pressing issues could and should have been addressed. In particular, the landlessness of peasants in the Non-Black Earth Region—it was feasible to implement the resettlement program initiated by Alexander III. Perhaps not switching to the gold standard, but embracing bimetallism. Create a legislative body similar to the Duma of 1906. Conduct a responsible foreign policy, providing adequate resources for one's desires: the ineptly lost Russo-Japanese War is an example. And hang more "fighters for the people's happiness." Instead of exiling them, where they blissed out on state payroll (if you don't know, exiles were provided with pay) and wrote their little books.
                      But, unfortunately, the monarchy has one flaw: someone like Nicholas II could end up in power.
                4. +1
                  9 May 2026 10: 36
                  Honestly, I've never heard of such a thing. Six-inch shells for the VTE were ordered, that was it (they turned out to be of so-so quality), but as for the cartridges...

                  Report of the War Ministry to the Special Conference on the Ordering of Rifle Cartridges Abroad. June 7, 1905.

                   
                  1. 0
                    9 May 2026 11: 48
                    Quote: hohol95
                    7th of June 1905

                    A strange story. There's been a lull at the front since March. Less than two months remain until the end of the war.
                    And did you order a lot?
                    1. +2
                      9 May 2026 13: 02
                      500 million pieces.
                      3 factories.
                      2 in Austria-Hungary (1 - Austria 1-Hungary/Budapest).
                      1 in Germany.
                      Delivery of ordered cartridges to the borders of the Russian Empire takes from one year to 15 months.
                      There were 64 million rounds of ammunition in the Far East.
                      572 million were sent to the Far East.
                      They were going to send 40 million into reserve.
                      But they didn't send it...
                      The shortage in Russia, excluding the Far East, is 580 million cartridges.
              2. +1
                9 May 2026 08: 05
                Quote: hohol95
                Austria-Hungary was forgotten.


                We can also remember England, which was essentially Japan’s ally at that time.
          2. +1
            12 May 2026 09: 03
            Quote: hohol95
            Could the Empire supply its army in the Far East without purchasing concentrates and delivering "rotten bull" (expired canned meat) from the USA to Kuropatkin's army?
            Why were mobilized soldiers (those still serving with Berdan rifles) sent to Kuropatkin's army, and not regular units from the European regions of the Empire?
            Why were cartridges for the "three-line" rifles smoked in the German Empire?

            And you about Liaoliang...

            Dear Alexey, I wasn't talking about production, I was talking about supplies. And no one anywhere is saying that the Russian army in Manchuria was deprived of something that was absolutely essential for fighting and winning.
            Were we able to cope? Absolutely. We bought them abroad—both we and Japan. Even England bought Arisakis from the Japanese during World War I—and nothing terrible happened.
            So, despite all the shortcomings of autocracy, it was able to concentrate and provide its forces with everything necessary for war and victory. Yes, without excesses, but with shortcomings, many of which became apparent during the fighting.
            And Liaoyang is simply very indicative here, that’s why I gave it as an example.
    3. +2
      8 May 2026 13: 13
      Quote: Trapper7
      Really? Wasn't the Russian army properly equipped? Or were the guns inferior?


      The United States itself was clearly inadequate. But ammunition production was particularly poor.
      And don't blame others. Yes, Germany had the best position in all calibers, including the super-large ones. But other powers also managed to quickly ramp up production of large calibers when the war became trench warfare. Even Austria-Hungary fared better in this regard than the Russian Empire, unfortunately. Russia's military hardware was a complete mess, and the Russian Nuclear War demonstrated this quite clearly.
      1. +4
        8 May 2026 14: 12
        Quote: Illanatol
        The United States itself was clearly inadequate. But ammunition production was particularly poor.

        Anatoly, again, I suggest looking at the context of my comment specifically in the article - and the article says that
        Russia entered World War I with a shortage of field artillery

        But they don't specify what exactly this "disadvantage" was. And I'm saying that Russian artillery in 1914, on the whole, accomplished its mission.
        You can talk all you want about the shortcomings of the weapons system, ammunition, and heavy guns—those are matters for the General Staff and the overall planning of the armed forces. And no mistresses had anything to do with it.
        1. 0
          8 May 2026 18: 35
          Already in the RYaV they realized that the "three-inch" needed a high-explosive grenade (HEG).
          Shrapnel shells alone were no match for the Japanese earthworks and Chinese adobe huts.
          But at the beginning of WWI, Russia did not produce OFS for three-inch guns!
          They couldn't make a detonator, and the French wouldn't share their detonator.
          And OFS was purchased from the French...
          And they themselves were producing "shrapnel", which required less and less.
        2. +1
          9 May 2026 08: 17
          And they told you exactly what the problem was—insufficient ammunition supplies. Have you heard of the "shell shortage"?
          No, I didn't manage it.
          And that's not entirely true... these aren't just problems of the General Staff, but problems of general industrial underdevelopment, a shortage of factories and plants, which, moreover, were privately owned, and not even by the "national bourgeoisie." In the pre-war period, our chemical industry (gunpowder production, which includes explosives) was largely under the de facto control of German capital.

          The problem of ammunition (and even then only of small calibers, field ammunition) was resolved relatively successfully only through nationalization at the very end of Nicholas's reign.
          1. +1
            12 May 2026 09: 26
            Quote: Illanatol
            And they told you exactly what the problem was—insufficient ammunition supplies. Have you heard of the "shell shortage"?

            And again we're moving away from the original comment about the mistress who's doing something...
            At the start of WWI, the artillery was fully equipped, including ammunition. The higher consumption came as a surprise to everyone.
            My comment wasn't about "later," and it certainly wasn't about how wonderfully we handled everything. It was about preparatory[i][/i] parts to the world war. If you cannot see and understand the difference between these two states, I am very sorry.
      2. 0
        8 May 2026 14: 52
        So the problem isn't stupid admirals (generals), but Russia's overall technical weakness. Many technologies were unavailable to Russian industry. Read Polikarpov's book; almost the entire book is about this.
        1. -1
          8 May 2026 15: 55
          Many technologies were unavailable to Russian industry
          - in more than a hundred years, little has changed....
          1. +2
            8 May 2026 16: 09
            It's impossible to be skilled in everything at once—the international division of labor, you know. Even China doesn't produce everything. Even the USSR, at its peak, still bought what it needed from the West—Toshiba milling machines, for example.
    4. +7
      8 May 2026 13: 31
      Quote: Trapper7
      Let's leave the number out of the equation (the size is still questionable IMHO), but what are the claims against Nicholas II?

      There's only one complaint: he didn't fire me on time. Nikolai has once again decided that his family's peace and his own peace of mind are above matters of state.
      How often, when I was arguing about a complete reorganization of the fleet that Uncle Alexei commanded, according to the traditions of the 18th century, I saw the Tsar shrug his shoulders in despair and say monotonously:
      "I know he won't like it. I'm telling you, Sandro, he won't tolerate it."
      "In that case, Nikki, you'll make him endure it. It's your duty to Russia."
      - But what can I do with it?
      "You are the King, Nikki. You can do what is necessary to protect our national interests."
      "All that's true, but I know Uncle Alexei. He'll be beside himself. I'm sure everyone in the palace will hear his screams."

      "I have no doubt about that, but all the better. Then you'll have an excellent excuse to dismiss him immediately and deny him further audiences."
      — How can I fire Uncle Alyosha? My father's beloved brother! You know, Sandro, I think that everything will be alright with my uncles, but during your stay in America, you yourself have become a big liberal.
      © Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich. Book of Memories.
      1. +3
        8 May 2026 14: 08
        Quote: Alexey RA
        There is only one complaint - he didn’t fire me on time.

        That's true. But on the other hand, at the beginning of his reign, he relied entirely on the cohort of "friends of the throne" that the pope left him.
        I completely agree with you, but expecting Nicholas II to take decisive action, especially during that period, is oh so unnecessary)))
      2. 0
        8 May 2026 18: 36
        The main thing is rest and nutrition!!!
        hi drinks drinks drinks
  12. + 12
    8 May 2026 09: 19
    What a nightmare:))))) It's even somehow funny.
    Things reached the point where, shortly before the fall of Port Arthur, the Grand Duke and Eliza were booed at the theater. Taking advantage of this scandal, officials from the naval department placed a report on Nicholas II's desk alleging a 2 million ruble arrears. But in 1903 alone, this high-society swindler stole 30 million. A few weeks after the theater incident, a crowd nearly destroyed the Semipudov Palace; the police barely managed to save the building. Realizing that St. Petersburg was becoming unsafe, Alexei Alexandrovich resigned.

    Just looking at the dates, Port Arthur fell in December 1904, meaning they booed him no later than November 1904. And Alexei Alexandrovich resigned on June 2, 1905, six months after the incident. What "several weeks"?
    In December 1897, a 7-year “program for the needs of the Far East” was adopted, which provided for the formation of a squadron there of 5 squadron battleships, 6 2nd-rank cruisers, 10 3rd-rank cruisers, 2 minelayers and 36 destroyer-destroyers.

    The squadron was planned to be formed like this
    Squadron battleships – 10 units;
    Armored cruisers—all available, including the Gromoboy, currently under construction, and the 7,500-ton cruiser (the future Bayan) ordered from France. In theory, there were eight of these—including the Vladimir Monomakh, Dmitry Donskoy, and Pamyat Azova;
    Armored deck cruisers – 20 units;
    Vulcan type transports - 2 units, in extreme cases - 1 unit;
    Mine layer - 1 unit;
    Sokol-class destroyers - 36 units;
    Destroyers already available in the theater - 11 units.
    This is the composition according to the decision of the meeting of December 12, 1897; it was subsequently modified, but was never the same as the author indicated.
    destroyers Novik 456 and Askold

    This is already a meme...
    At first I thought it was an AI, but then I realized that AI can't do that. laughing
    1. +6
      8 May 2026 11: 38
      Andrey Nikolaevich, are you hiding something? feel !
      Theme of armored belay destroyers (armor attachment on tallow belay candles!) the era of the Russian Yav is not revealed!
      laughing
      1. +6
        8 May 2026 12: 07
        Quote: Wildcat
        Andrey Nikolaevich, are you hiding something? feel !
        Theme of armored belay destroyers (armor attachment on tallow belay candles!) the era of the Russian Yav is not revealed!
        laughing

        Why, the topic of "wooden" rivets on squadron battleships has already been discussed several times on VO (most recently a year ago).
        1. +3
          8 May 2026 12: 30
          laughing
          Lard, not wood!
          good
          The secret method of attaching armor "on fat" had its advantages:
          - tallow candles are known for their strength
          - they do not corrode and protect metals from corrosion themselves
          - having a certain elasticity, they evenly distribute the load and in some cases throw the projectile towards the enemy
          - having a certain greasiness, the spark plugs seemed to "lubricate" the incoming projectile and it "slid" along the armor without penetrating it (the so-called "Marr de Jacob effect on lard" with different sliding coefficients)
          - the grease from the candles lubricated the ship's hull, and it glided faster across the water, like a plump figure skater on ice (the so-called "Anna Semenovich effect")
          - According to a long-standing maritime tradition, before the hungry crew proceeds to "cannibalism by vote," the lard candles must be eaten....
          request
          1. +4
            8 May 2026 13: 20
            Quote: Wildcat
            A secret method for attaching armor "on fat"

            You're taking a huge risk. You'll face severe penalties for promoting Ukrainian national values! laughing
            1. +8
              8 May 2026 13: 25
              Attaching armor "on fat" is a historically Russian method, recorded in chronicles.
              "Come to me, brother, in Moscow, we will fasten the mirror (a type of ancient Russian plate armor - translator's note) to the lard." "This is the first written mention of Moscow and the use of "salo" armor, dated to the spring of 1147 in the Ipatiev Chronicle. The phrase was uttered by the Rostov-Suzdal Prince Yuri Dolgoruky, inviting his ally, the Novgorod-Seversk Prince Svyatoslav Olgovich, to a meeting."
              request
              1. +5
                8 May 2026 13: 55
                Quote: Wildcat
                Attaching armor "on fat" is a historically Russian method, recorded in chronicles.

                If you can prove this in court and make a deal with the investigation, they might reduce your sentence to 5-7 years in a maximum security prison, but I wouldn't count on a suspended sentence. laughing
                1. +3
                  8 May 2026 14: 11
                  what
                  up to 5-7 strict regime, but I wouldn't count on a suspended sentence

                  Thanks for the advice, I'm not very good with criminal matters. feel , more and more arbitration...
                  Maybe I'll get out of jail, like Remeslo, through the madhouse. fellow , - what do you think?
                  recourse
                  Still, 4262 (!!!) posts on the Military Review forum couldn't have passed without leaving a trace for me personally... and the last posts "about lard" seem to hint at it wassat ...
                  crying
                  On the other hand, as Cipollino said:
                  "My poor father! They threw you in jail like a criminal, along with thieves and bandits!..
                  “What are you saying, what are you saying, son?” his father interrupted him affectionately. “But there are plenty of honest people in prison!”
                  – What are they in jail for? What bad did they do?
                  "Absolutely nothing, son. That's exactly why they were put away. Prince Lemon doesn't like decent people."
                  "So, going to prison is a great honor?" he asked.
                  "It turns out that's true. Prisons are built for those who steal and kill, but for Prince Lemon it's the other way around: thieves and murderers live in his palace, while honest citizens sit in prison."

                  request
                  And Baron Munchausen would not have condemned either:
                  " - Prison awaits you.
                  “A wonderful place… Here next to me are Ovid, Cervantes – we will tap each other’s fingers.”

                  crying
                  Do you know if it would be possible to bring a phone with internet there somehow? Smartphones - they feel big ... feel
                  1. 0
                    8 May 2026 18: 39
                    Only disc and no cord!
                    And without a pipe...
                    hi drinks drinks drinks
      2. +3
        8 May 2026 12: 27
        Quote: Wildcat
        The topic of armored belay destroyers

        Nooo, that's without me:)))))))
  13. +4
    8 May 2026 09: 42
    If the conversation even slightly touches on the "High Martyr" and "Martyr" Nicholas II, one can immediately expect heated debate. Although, it would seem, what's there to argue about? The man destroyed everything that could and couldn't be destroyed, brought the country to two revolutions and a civil war. He's like Gorbachev and Yeltsin rolled into one, but...
    1. -12
      8 May 2026 10: 56
      The USSR's enemies don't care about any of this; they just want to create an anti-Soviet myth about how everything was fine before the October Revolution. If, instead of Nicholas II, it had been 12-year-old Peter II or Anna Ioannovna, who was slain by the people during the Bloody Revolution, they would have created the same anti-Soviet myth about them, about how everything was fine under them.
    2. 0
      7 October 2026 23: 29
      * brought the country to two revolutions and a civil war, just Gorbachev and Yeltsin in one bottle, but...*

      But we turn on the *Spas* channel, and there are churchmen:

      Let's create a mural in honor of Emperor Nicholas II in Yekaterinburg together. To do this, send a text message to the short code 7101 with the word "Tsar" and the donation amount, for example, "Tsar 1000."

      In Yekaterinburg, they say, so that the bakers would have a place to shed tears for the holy Tsar.
  14. +4
    8 May 2026 10: 00
    The fleet is not only ships and sailors, the fleet is also bases and basing points.
    How many of them were there in the Far East and what condition were they in?
  15. +7
    8 May 2026 11: 39
    Short-legged and rather plump, Matilda Kshesinskaya liked to call herself the "mistress of the House of Romanov" - It's clear that if a person says he understands history, then he's definitely an expert in the history of Russian ballet.

    I won't presume to discuss who and how ladies should have spent their time, but Kschessinskaia was an outstanding ballerina. Standards for dancers were different. She had long legs, slender ankles, and extraordinary flexibility—ideal qualities for ballet. However, in her youth, she was underweight, her short stature (152 cm) and thinness were considered flaws. She had to gain weight.
    And yet she showed herself to be an outstanding performer, and only then did her love affairs come into play.
    At the age of 13 (1885) - debut in "Swan Lake" - the role of the changing swan.
    At the age of 15 (1887) - first role - Anna in "The Sleeping Beauty".
    At 16 years old, she was the first prima ballerina in the imperial theatres – the youngest in history.
    1890: She entered the main stage of the Mariinsky Theatre as the first prima ballerina.
    Repertoire:
    Alice in Sleeping Beauty is her leading role, where she performed 32 fouettés without stopping for the first time — a record that has not been broken for decades.
    Cinderella, Giselle, Tatiana in "The Northern Tale" - her interpretations have become the standard.
    Style:
    The technique is impeccable, almost mechanically precise.
    Expressiveness is deep emotionality, almost theatrical dramaturgy.
    The aesthetic is “cold grace”, combining Eastern sophistication and Western austerity.
    1. +1
      8 May 2026 12: 29
      If a modern ballerina is 170 cm tall (the standard), she should weigh no more than 48 kg. Kshesinskaya, at 153 cm, weighed 50 kg. In other words, by today's ballet standards, she was a plump, short woman. Today, no one would likely like her. But beauty standards were certainly different back then.
      1. +6
        8 May 2026 12: 50
        If a modern ballerina is 170 cm tall (the standard), she should weigh no more than 48 kg. Kshesinskaya, at 153 cm, weighed 50 kg. In other words, by today's ballet standards, she was a plump, short woman. Today, no one would likely like her. But beauty standards were certainly different back then.
        Back then, ballet served a slightly different function than it does now.But it is not exactly", about now, especially in the part "male ballet".
        feel
        An example of how ballet functioned in polite society ("squeeze" lol A ballerina friend of mine was not "according to the rules" angry (before the duel); however, the members of the "potato club" looked at the question lol wider): "Istomina was kept by the cavalry guard staff captain Vasily Sheremetev for two years and lived in his apartment. A quarrel ensued, and Istomina moved in with her friend. On November 17, the provincial secretary of the Collegium of Foreign Affairs and aspiring writer Alexander Griboyedov, who was friends with Sheremetev, invited the ballerina to tea with another friend, the chamberlain Count A.P. Zavadovsky, with whom he shared an apartment in the capital. There were rumors that Istomina danced completely naked for some men, and the subsequent fate of these men was tragic. According to one version, Griboyedov and Zavadovsky immediately began to persuade the ballerina to dance naked in front of them, she warned them about the "spell", but they continued to insist, and she agreed [source not specified 669 days]. It is reliably known that Istomina stayed in Zavadovsky's apartment for two days [source not specified 669 days], which subsequently prompted Sheremetev, who learned about this, to consider himself insulted.

        Sheremetev was away, but when he returned, at the instigation of A. I. Yakubovich, he challenged Zavadovsky to a duel. Yakubovich and Griboyedov also promised to fight. The harshest conditions were agreed upon—shooting within six paces.

        Sheremetev fired first, before reaching the barrier. The bullet passed so close to Zavadovsky's body that it tore off the collar of his frock coat. [Source not specified for 669 days] Shocked by the proximity of death, Zavadovsky grew furious, called on his opponent to approach his barrier as per the terms of the duel, and fired at his stomach from six paces away. Sheremetev jumped several times, then fell and began rolling in the snow. Kaverin, who was present at the duel, approached the wounded man and said to him, "What, Vasya, a turnip?" (The turnip-shaped medal was awarded in the cadet corps to the first person to fall from a horse during training exercises. [1] [2]) Yakubovich, a marksman, an active duelist, and a great expert in duels, pulled out the bullet and handed it to Griboyedov with the words, "This is for you." Due to the tragic outcome of the first duel, the second duel was postponed. A day later, Sheremetev died [source not specified for 669 days].

        The second duel took place only in the autumn of 1818. Yakubovich was transferred to Tiflis on duty, and Griboyedov, who was on his way to Persia on a diplomatic mission, was also passing through.

        Griboyedov understood that, wittingly or unwittingly, he had provoked the previous tragic duel that had ended in the death of his former friend Sheremetev, and now he feared another death. Therefore, Griboyedov tried to reason with Yakubovich, but since he was determined to fight, Griboyedov was forced to go all the way.

        Initially, the duelists planned to shoot in Yakubovich's apartment, but Yakubovich's second, Nikolai Muravyov (the future Muravyov-Karsky), suggested a more convenient location—a ravine near the Tatar Tomb outside the village of Kuki. Griboyedov's second was his colleague, diplomat A.K. Amburger. Barriers were set. The opponents advanced toward each other and waited for about a minute. Finally, Yakubovich fired.[3] The bullet pierced Griboyedov's little finger on his left hand (this wound later helped identify Griboyedov's mutilated body, killed by religious fanatics during the sacking of the Russian embassy in Tehran). Griboyedov raised his bloody hand and aimed his pistol at Yakubovich. Muravyov, Yakubovich's second, who was turned against Griboyedov, writes that Yakubovich did not want to kill, and Griboyedov, noticing this, shot back, also not moving towards the barrier (that is, towards the enemy), although he had the right to do so according to the terms of the duel."
        (c) Wikipedia
      2. +4
        8 May 2026 12: 53
        Everything was different: the canons of beauty, the demands placed on ballet dancers, the choreography itself, the aesthetics of ballet as an art form.
        In addition, the ballerina's parameters changed with age
        9 years old 1881 ~135 cm ~28–30 kg Upon entering school - thin, but flexible, with long limbs.
        15 years old 1887 ~150 cm ~38–40 kg Debuted as a prima – slender, with developed muscles in her legs and back.
        18 years old 1890 152 cm 42 kg At the peak of technical form - the ideal height/weight ratio for ballet of that time.
        25 years old 1897 152 cm 45 kg After the birth of my son - a slight increase in weight, but maintaining a slim figure.
        35 years old 1907 152 cm 48–50 kg At the peak of artistic maturity - muscles became more pronounced, weight increased due to strength and endurance.
    2. 0
      8 May 2026 13: 39
      Quote: balabol
      And yet she proved herself to be an outstanding performer.

      and a great worker - she worked, taught, danced until old age, was a wonderful mother and wife, loved home comfort and was passionately involved in her home.

      In communication she was an intelligent, educated woman.
  16. +2
    8 May 2026 11: 51
    To be honest, the first article didn't live up to expectations; I hope the second part will focus on the development of the fleet.
    Moreover, his father suddenly abandoned the traditional alliance with Germany (Prussia), which had existed since the Napoleonic Wars, and entered into an alliance with France, the recent aggressor during the Crimean War.

    In creating this alliance, each side was guided by its own interests. For France, this was aimed at opposing England, Italy, Austria-Hungary, and Germany. This was in line with Russia's goals.
  17. -1
    8 May 2026 13: 16
    Quote: Trapper7
    Well, there didn't seem to be any others on the horizon))) We don't border with France, and with England - it's pointless


    A common border is irrelevant for naval warfare. Could you remind me if there was a naval threat from France, particularly during the Crimean War?
    1. +1
      8 May 2026 14: 24
      Quote: Illanatol
      The common border is of no importance for war at sea.

      Oh, absolutely. Almost all of our naval battles since the 18th century have been fought against bordering powers. There are perhaps three exceptions: the Anglo-Russian War of 1807-1812 (thanks to Ivan for reminding me of that), Ushakov's expedition, and the Crimean War itself. But the Crimean War also doesn't really fit—the allies supported Turkey, which was quite a border country.
      1. 0
        9 May 2026 08: 25
        You never know who supported whom.
        When English squadrons appeared in the Baltic, White Sea and Far East, Türkiye was of no importance.
        Only a very naive person could believe that England and France fought for Turkey's interests back then. Just like NATO has signed on for Ukraine's interests now. laughing
        Both Ukraine now and Turkey then were and are merely "proxies" of Western powers. Türkiye and Ukraine are servants of the West, not the other way around.

        They forgot to mention the American-English War of 1812-1815.
        1. 0
          12 May 2026 08: 27
          Quote: Illanatol
          They forgot to mention the American-English War of 1812-1815.

          No, I haven't forgotten)
          Canada is part of the UK, so it doesn't count.
  18. +5
    8 May 2026 13: 54
    In January of the following year, the destroyers Novik 456 and Askold reached Port Arthur

    There's a faint hope, of course, that this is just the site's engine acting up, but...
    Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich, nicknamed "Bulldog" by his family

    "Bulldog" was not what they called him, but Tsarevich Alexander, the future Peacemaker.
    As for the rest, I'll say this: Ryzhov disgraced himself in a way that I never would have been able to do. request
    1. +2
      8 May 2026 15: 00
      Maybe you didn't write it yourself? Did the AI ​​screw you over a bit?
      1. +1
        8 May 2026 16: 01
        I remember the cartoon "Holidays in Prostokvashino" where Uncle Fyodor wrote a letter to his parents... bully
      2. +4
        8 May 2026 16: 13
        Quote: TermNachTER
        Maybe you didn't write it yourself? Did the AI ​​screw you over a bit?

        The devil knows, really.
        But in general, problems with extracted text happen on many resources. It eats commas, changes letters...
        You know, it’s hard to accuse me of sympathy for Ryzhov, but this is completely beyond the pale.
  19. -1
    8 May 2026 15: 00
    Nicholas II with a tattoo made in Japan

    I read somewhere that the Japanese were shocked because such tattoos were then a sign of belonging to the yakuza - and suddenly a foreign prince wanted to get one.
    1. +4
      8 May 2026 15: 03
      Quote: vet
      Nicholas II with a tattoo made in Japan

      I read somewhere that the Japanese were shocked because such tattoos were then a sign of belonging to the yakuza - and suddenly a foreign prince wanted to get one.

      Maybe we don't know something? wink
      1. +2
        8 May 2026 16: 29
        Quote: Trapper7
        Maybe we don't know something?

        It's funny, but there is some truth to this.
        The fact is that the yakuza in the modern sense was only just emerging at that time, and Tokugawa vassals who had been pushed out of power often became members of this criminal organization.
        And the infamous Tsuda Sanzo for some reason decided that foreign princes were spying for either the "miraculously saved" Saito Takomori (leader of the Satsuma Rebellion) or his surviving supporters.
        1. 0
          12 May 2026 16: 43
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          The infamous Tsuda Sanzo for some reason decided that foreign princes were spying for either the "miraculously saved" Saito Takomori (leader of the Satsuma Rebellion) or his surviving supporters.

          Wait, Ivan. Are you saying this samurai policeman was trying to combat foreign espionage in this way? belay
          1. +1
            13 May 2026 15: 17
            Quote: Trapper7
            Was Amurai the policeman trying to fight foreign espionage in this way?

            There is such a version.
            Only espionage not in favor of foreigners, but of the emperor's opponents.
  20. 0
    8 May 2026 15: 13
    Novik and Askold - destroyers?!!!
    As for Nikolashka and his whole family and uncles... It couldn't have ended any other way.
  21. Fat
    +6
    8 May 2026 15: 45
    which turned out to be a shareholder in the Putilov factory. As a result, all contracts for artillery production went to this factory, which simply couldn't handle the volume of work, and Russia entered World War I with a shortage of field artillery.

    The passage is more than strange. The Putilov factory was a private enterprise, while other cannon factories were mostly state-owned, and operated by different departments.
    It was the engineers at the Putilov Plant who developed the 76mm cannon, model 1900-1902, which won the field gun competition. The Putilov Plant received the order. Motvilikha, a state-owned factory, produced large-caliber cannons. The state-owned Obukhov and Arsenal Plants in St. Petersburg were reconstructed, but they nonetheless made their fair share of contributions to cannon production.
    1. +2
      8 May 2026 16: 15
      Kseshinskaya, like anyone else with money, could have invested it in any joint-stock company. Not without some advice on where to invest. There was a minor element of corruption, but nothing outrageous.
  22. -2
    8 May 2026 16: 55
    Quote: Trapper7
    Quote: Grencer81
    If they suffered defeat, then it was clearly predetermined.

    Well, since we're not dealing with theology here, you're mistaken. It would have been preordained if Tsarist Russia had failed to concentrate the required number of troops and supply them with the necessary supplies. But at the Battle of Liaoyang, the Russian army was well-supplied and achieved a decisive victory. Only Kuropatkin's order, which misjudged the situation, turned that victory into a resounding defeat.
    I am writing this so that you understand that Imperial Russia was not a whipping boy at all, and even Japan’s previous and subsequent victories were extremely difficult for it and were connected primarily with the actions of the commander.
    As for the choice of candidate, the Tsar had compelling reasons for appointing him—he was a distinguished soldier and a decent (and perhaps even excellent) administrator. By the time the mistake was realized, it was too late. But I'm not defending Nicholas II in this regard—Kuropatkin should have been replaced earlier.
    I simply want to say that the poor choice of commander has only an indirect relation to the empire as a whole and speaks more to a crisis in the management system, which was also not fatal.
    And Russia's defeat in the Russian Nuclear War is certainly not tied to the development of artillery in WWI.

    So, overall, it's only Kuropatkin's fault? And Nikolai himself, to a certain extent?
    So there was a lot of everything?
    I beg you!!!
    1. +1
      12 May 2026 09: 34
      Quote: Grencer81
      So there was a lot of everything?

      I didn't write "a lot." I wrote "enough." If that's not true, give me examples of the Russian army retreating due to a lack of something, like famine, lack of ammunition, or epidemics. Such phenomena did occur during the First World War—and they're well-known. Give me examples from the Russian Revolution.
      If not, then have the courage to admit that you are wrong.
      So, overall, it's only Kuropatkin's fault? And Nikolai himself, to a certain extent?

      A common problem with the command staff. Yes.
      Do you have a different opinion? Then please voice it.
      1. 0
        12 May 2026 16: 46
        In war, nothing is ever enough.
        Were machine guns enough?
        Was there enough artillery?
        Trouble with the team staff?
        Where did he come from?
        And why is it that the junior and middle command staff are quite up to the demands of combat, while the senior ones are more like courtiers than military personnel?
  23. +2
    8 May 2026 17: 35
    Excerpts from M.A. Belousov's memoirs, "Khrushchev in Port Arthur." Events of October 1954 and later.
    Available online.
    The commander of the 39th Army, Colonel General V.I. Shvetsov, makes a report. But:
    "...Khrushchev slammed his palm on the table and practically shouted: 'Enough chatter! You better tell me why you are standing here?'... 'Yes, yes, I'm asking: why are you and your troops standing here on Liaodong?'"
    The commander wasn't prepared to answer such a question. He looked at Khrushchev again with a somewhat distrustful expression and calmly said, "To protect our Motherland's Far Eastern borders."
    Khrushchev interrupts him again and angrily declares: "This is a tsarist, imperialist policy. Who are you planning to protect here, and from whom? You'd better tell me how long it will take until not a single one of your soldiers, not even your spirit, remains here."
    An interesting assessment by Khrushchev (who gave Port Arthur to China) of the policy of Tsarist Russia in the Far East.
    Next:
    Khrushchev continued: “Everything that was built here (meaning on Kwantung) by the Russian Tsar, us, and the Japanese—barracks, warehouses, houses, reservoirs, etc.—should be given to the Chinese free of charge, without compensation. And what we brought here from the Soviet Union—should be sold.”
    About Russian artillery:
    "Then V. I. Shvetsov asked Khrushchev a question. 'Nikita Sergeyevich,' he said, 'what should we do with those shells and three-inch guns (referring to the 76-mm guns) that were brought here at the start of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905? They're still sitting in our warehouses.'"
    Khrushchev: "Sell!"
    In general, Khrushchev suffered with the legacy of Russian tsarism in the Far East.
    1. +2
      8 May 2026 20: 18
      Quote: billybones
      Khrushchev interrupts him again and angrily declares: "This is a tsarist, imperialist policy. Whom and from whom are you going to protect here now?

      The question is valid. Who was the USSR planning to protect China from with its base in the far corner of the Yellow Sea? All other European powers' bases had already been eliminated, and North Korea stood between the closest enemy (South Korea) and the base.
      Moreover, the basing conditions for the Navy in the Polish-Azerbaijani Peninsula have only worsened: with the advent of nuclear weapons, naval forces in the harbor will only need one bomb. But the narrow exit from the harbor remains.

      And let's not forget that the return of the Polish-Azerbaijani Empire to China took place with the tacit approval of the rest of the "Stalinist guard" - Molotov, Kaganovich, Bulganin, etc.
      1. +2
        9 May 2026 06: 01
        This is something. Judging by your reasoning, there's no point in explaining anything to you. It's all over the place.
        Nevertheless, for readers, I'll provide another quote from Belousov's memoirs:
        "...Chief of Staff, General V.V. Turantayev: 'Nikita Sergeyevich! In South Korea (he pointed to the map), in addition to its troops, there is now a fully equipped American 8th Army, led by General Clark. That same army and that same general with whom our 1st Ukrainian Front joined forces in Germany in April 1945. And that army alone has 500 tanks. Then there are units of 15 countries stationed there, brought in, practically, by the Americans with the help of the UN. So, all we have to do is leave here, and the Americans, if they want, will be here, in Kwantung, in three days.' (It seemed to me that Malinovsky understood what was being said.)
        Khrushchev interrupts Turantayev and declares, "They won't. The former leadership of our country seized and rented out foreign lands: in China, Korea, Finland, and now we have to deal with it."

        So, according to Khrushchev, Finland also suffered under Stalin, which was an ally of Hitler (details online).
        In 1955, the Soviet naval base in Porkkala-Udd was closed. Finland's subsequent drift, culminating in its accession to NATO, is well known.
        Is there any threat to St. Petersburg and the surrounding area? Are you sure?

        Latest news:
        Exercises involving the Finnish Navy's coastal brigade and military personnel from other countries will begin in the Gulf of Finland on Monday, May 4.
        The exercises will take place off the coast of Virolahti, Hamina, and Kotka in two phases: from May 4 to 8 and from May 17 to 29, RIA Novosti reports. The Finnish Navy stated that fortifications will be constructed during the maneuvers and will remain in place after the exercises. The number of Finnish and foreign troops participating in the exercises is unknown.
        It was previously reported that Finland began artillery exercises, Northern Strike 26, 70 kilometers from the border with Russia.

        I would like to note the de facto continuity of Stalin's foreign policy towards Tsarist Russia: a consistent expansion of the country's influence, albeit not always successful.
        1. +2
          9 May 2026 16: 38
          Quote: billybones
          In South Korea (he pointed to the map), in addition to its troops, there is now a fully equipped American 8th Army, led by General Clark. That same army and that same general with whom our 1st Ukrainian Front joined forces in Germany in April 1945. And that army alone has 500 tanks. Then there are units of 15 countries stationed there, practically brought in by the Americans with the help of the UN. So, if we were to leave here, the Americans, if they so choose, would be here, in Kwantung, in three days.

          And all this force is held back by only three divisions of the 39th Army, which remained with it after 1946. laughing And if they leave and the enemy attacks, the USSR will immediately violate the treaty with the PRC and will not provide military assistance in the event of imperialist aggression.
          Oh, by the way, when the 39th Army actually left, did the vile bourgeoisie attack? Did they capture Kwantung? wink
          Quote: billybones
          In 1955, the Soviet naval base in Porkkala-Udd was closed. Finland's subsequent drift, culminating in its accession to NATO, is well known.
          Is there any threat to St. Petersburg and the surrounding area? Are you sure?

          Please tell me, how can the Porkkala-Udd naval base, located opposite Tallinn and surrounded on all sides by enemy territory, defend St. Petersburg, whose main threat comes from land? Will it even be able to defend itself?
          Or do you think that the enemy will push towards St. Petersburg through the Gulf of Finland with battleships of the Trump class? wink
          Wasn't Hanko's example enough for you? Did the base help Leningrad? It was blockaded by secondary forces, and then the Baltic Fleet lost almost as many ships as in the Tallinn Passage to extract the garrison.
  24. Fat
    +4
    8 May 2026 17: 56
    The idea that the Russian Empire suffered a shortage of shells during the war, caused by poor performance of shell factories, is largely a myth. The biggest problem was logistics. The Russian Empire's railways failed to ensure timely delivery of the shortage to consumers.
    And regarding production:
    Firstly, this was a common occurrence during the First World War, when military leaders had no idea of ​​the nature of the upcoming military operations. They had expected one war, but what they got was quite another. And in this other war, all ammunition reserves vanished in an instant. The amount they had expected to expend over several months of combat was sometimes fired in a week or two.
    Secondly, the term itself (Shell Crisis), as I understand it, came from Great Britain, where as a result the government even changed – everything was so bad there.
    Thirdly, and most importantly, the indicator isn't the phenomenon itself, for it was common, but who emerged from it and how. And here it must be said that Russia was certainly not among the worst. Before blaming the Russian Imperial authorities for the shell famine, it should be remembered that the shells produced before 1918 were sufficient for the Civil War, the conflicts between wars (including wars in other countries where they supplied weapons and shells), and World War II, which also couldn't be used up. I can say with certainty that shells for the Tsarist-era three-inch guns remained in commercial quantities in 2014 and were actively used. What "famine" can we call that?

    And versions close to the one quoted are expressed almost everywhere.
    1. 0
      8 May 2026 19: 02
      And is rifle hunger a myth?
      And a machine gun?
      And the cartridge?
      And most importantly, the automobile and aviation "gololuhs" are 100% myths...
      They produced everything themselves and didn’t retreat until Moscow...
      The army simply fell apart on its own.
      She's probably tired.
      1. +3
        9 May 2026 07: 41
        Quote: hohol95
        They produced everything themselves and didn’t retreat until Moscow...

        Are you still talking about WWI and RYA? belay
        1. -1
          9 May 2026 10: 42
          This is what a person wrote about WWI.
          Or have I confused WWI and RYaV and there is not a word about WWI?
          1. +3
            9 May 2026 11: 40
            Quote: hohol95
            This is what a person wrote about WWI.

            yes
            Quote: hohol95
            They didn't retreat to Moscow.

            Are you absolutely sure that we retreated in WWI? to Moscow?
            1. -1
              9 May 2026 13: 07
              On the contrary.
              Those who fight against the "Bolsheviks and other Reds" always point out that the Wehrmacht reached "the walls of the White Stone" in 1941.
              In 1917, the army of the Second Reich was much further from Moscow and Petrograd.
              And that means it was necessary to continue fighting, and not organize a revolution.
              1. 0
                9 May 2026 15: 17
                Quote: hohol95
                On the contrary.

                Now I understand.
                Sorry. I didn't catch the irony.
                1. +2
                  9 May 2026 15: 33
                  HAPPY VICTORY DAY IN THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR!!!

                  It happens. I sometimes "slow down" myself...
                  I'm getting old ...
    2. +3
      8 May 2026 19: 56
      Quote: Thick
      Before blaming the Russian Empire's authorities for a shortage of shells, it should be remembered that the shells produced before 1918 were sufficient for the Civil War, for conflicts between wars (including wars in other countries where weapons and shells were supplied), and for the Second World War, which also could not be used up.

      The devil is in the details.
      The front was primarily short of 107mm, 122mm, and 152mm shells. However, these calibers had been unlucky even in peacetime.
      ...by the beginning of the war, the shortage of rounds for 122 mm light howitzers amounted to 12% of the allotted quantity of 1000 rounds per howitzer for the entire war, and that the heavy field artillery entered the campaign with only half of the allotted sets: 75% of rounds were missing for 107 mm guns with an established set of 1200 rounds per gun, and 39% of rounds for 152 mm howitzers with a set of 1000 rounds per howitzer
      © Barsukov
      The 76mm caliber specifically lacked high-explosive grenades. Until 1916, factories primarily churned out 76mm shrapnel shells, which were useless in trench warfare. Even later, the ratio of shrapnel to grenades produced was higher than needed (approximately 40:60, compared to the frontline's demand of 20:80). This resulted in a paradoxical situation: the rampart plan was met, but shells were in short supply.
      These shrapnel shots (complete and incomplete) were then used until the 50s.

      By the way, the same Baruskov has a wonderful description of the transition of Russian industry to a war footing:
      The establishment of shell production in Russia began in August 1914, but a number of difficulties were encountered in implementing all the necessary measures: the closure of German markets, from which Russian industry had almost exclusively acquired machine tools and equipment in peacetime; the closure of the Baltic Sea ports, through which foreign cargo primarily arrived in Russia; a shortage of the required items on the world market in general, due to the need to satisfy the enormous needs of all the belligerent powers, and only Russia; a shortage of gold; difficulties in transportation due to the poor development of the railway network in Russia and the insufficient rolling stock; the lack of experience of Russian factories, which were taking up the manufacture of shells for the first time; finally, the sinking by the Germans in the Baltic Sea of ​​several steamships carrying machine tools, mechanisms and materials necessary for equipping shell production at Russian factories, etc.

      Have I seen this somewhere before? laughing
      1. Fat
        +3
        8 May 2026 21: 10
        Large-caliber guns were manufactured at Motovilikha, and shell casings were also produced there. Large-caliber guns were primarily Canet-type guns. It's worth noting that this designer received royalties for each product. In my opinion, the development of relations with allied France, or rather with its citizen and entrepreneur, was unfortunate.
        1. +5
          8 May 2026 21: 47
          Quote: Thick
          Large caliber guns are mainly Canet guns.

          These were naval. The army had another French one - Schneider. And a little Krupp. smile

          According to Barsukov, the Perm plant produced about 510 thousand shrapnel and grenades of 122 mm caliber (out of 5,8 million produced in Russia) and about 430 thousand shrapnel and grenades of 152 mm caliber (out of 3,9 million produced in Russia) from 1914 to 1917.

          If we take medium-caliber shells above 76 mm as a whole, then, as Manikovsky wrote, even with the maximum achieved productivity and even only in terms of shell bodies (without taking into account the other elements of the shot and its delivery), the industry could not meet the needs of the front:
          ...the demand for shells for medium-caliber guns, which arose during the war, was not covered by the productivity of Russian factories, even in terms of shell casings alone. For example, at their peak productivity in 1917, Russian factories manufactured approximately 758.000 107-mm shells, while 1.200.000 rounds for 107-mm guns were required in 1917; approximately 3.238.000 122-mm shells were manufactured, while 4.800.000 rounds were required; approximately 2.685.000 152-mm shells were manufactured, while approximately 2.800.000 rounds were required.
          1. Fat
            +1
            9 May 2026 09: 09
            Quote: Alexey RA
            These were naval. The army had another French one - Schneider. And a little Krupp.

            Five years after Russia acquired the Canet designs, in 1897, the Forges et Chantiers de la Meditterane factories were purchased by Schneider & Cie. From that moment on, Gustave Canet was appointed head of the artillery departments of both the acquired Le Havre factories and Schneider & Cie itself. During this period, French Canet 6-inch guns were stamped with the inscription "Schneider & Cie," although the previous commemorative "Schneider-Canet" stamps also existed.
            Actually, this is one enterprise, until 1907 under the leadership of Gustav Kane.
            1. +1
              9 May 2026 10: 37
              Quote: Thick
              In 1897, the Forges et Chantiers de la Meditterane factories were purchased by Schneider & Cie. From that moment on, Gustave Canet was appointed head of the artillery departments of both the acquired Le Havre factories and Schneider & Cie itself.

              You phrased your comment slightly incorrectly. "Forges et Chantiers de la Méditerranée" sold only its artillery production. This is due to the French Navy Ministry's low interest in acquiring Canet guns.
              1. Fat
                +1
                9 May 2026 16: 32
                Forges et Chantiers de la Méditerranée translates as forges and shipyards of the Mediterranean. It's clear that Schneider bought the forges, or rather the Canet factories, the part of the company not directly involved in shipbuilding. I can't even imagine how this could be rewritten to make it even clearer. request
                1. 0
                  9 May 2026 17: 38
                  Quote: Thick
                  Forges et Chantiers de la Méditerranée translates as forges and shipyards of the Mediterranean. It's clear that Schneider bought the forges, or rather the Canet factories, the part of the company not directly involved in shipbuilding. I can't even imagine how this could be rewritten to make it even clearer.

                  Dear Andrey, at that time the concept of a plant was interpreted slightly differently than it is today.
                  " A la suite d'une décision prize par l'assemblée générale de la Société des forges et chantiers de la Méditerranée tenue le 23 January, les Ateliers d'artillerie du Havre appartenant à cette Société ont fusionné avec ceux que les Usines du Creusot avaient déjà pour le même objet. "1897.
    3. -1
      9 May 2026 08: 44
      Quote: Thick
      And versions close to the one quoted are expressed almost everywhere.


      These are not versions of garbage, but the delirium of the bakers.
      In trench warfare, long-range, large-caliber artillery (6 inches or more) is most in demand, capable of destroying defensive lines. In this regard, the situation was simply dire... even naval artillery from unfinished battleships had to be sent to the front.

      https://sun9-34.userapi.com/s/v1/ig2/Mtt8oCFGUQkd6yn92t5w4S5hSBZSfCgl4O3OZRPiI15N11KXbZnE95nZ5KluxBQhdLfMm71t58E4F4_IPNaKVVuh.jpg?quality=96&as=32x14,48x21,72x31,108x47,160x70,240x105,360x157,480x209,540x236,640x279,658x287&from=bu&cs=658x0
      1. +1
        9 May 2026 16: 53
        Quote: Illanatol
        In this regard, the situation was simply deplorable... they even had to send naval artillery from unfinished battleships to the front.

        The artillery of the LK on land is most likely Germany, France and the USA.
        Russia had no "free" artillery for the unfinished battleships—they didn't have time or couldn't produce them. So, for the TAON, they initially "divided" the coastal defenses, giving the army 12-inch howitzers, 11-inch and 9-inch mortars, and 10-inch and 6-inch guns. Then came the OSZ, Vickers, and Schneider guns.
  25. +2
    9 May 2026 09: 13
    The attempt (judging by the text) to link the replacement of rivets with wooden plugs and lard reveals the author's complete bias and, it seems, incompetence. These are isolated cases of missed holes being patched during riveting, due to the shoddy work of, at most, the foreman. And in these cases, the naval leadership, and especially the country's leadership, for all its shortcomings, is completely innocent.
    1. 0
      9 May 2026 12: 21
      Well, yes, the naval leadership, which is supposed to exercise control, is not to blame, and the Emperor, who appoints such leadership, is not to blame. The question arises: were there such cases in the German navy? Or the British? And why weren't there?
      So we can agree that our "galley slave" isn't to blame for anything, he's a good guy, and it's the deputies of his friend the Minister of Defense who are the bad thieves. Just like all those obscenely rich judges, traffic cops, and high-ranking officials who fled abroad with stolen money. This is a far-reaching systemic failure, not the "mistakes" of the foremen.
      1. +3
        9 May 2026 14: 59
        Quote: vet
        The question arises: were there such cases in the German navy? Or the British?

        Which ones?
        Things got to the point that, for the sake of economy, there were cases where armor plates were fastened not with metal rivets, but with wooden bushings, and on one of the destroyers, tallow candles were even used for this purpose.

        Armor on wooden crutches was actually installed at least once. But not in our navy, but in the British one. On the Etna-class armored batteries.
        But I think I know where your idol got this from. From a book by a certain Mikhail Pazin. A yellow journalist who calls himself a historian and publishes 18+ books with telling titles like "Sex on the Throne."
        Do I need to tell you that some people should be more careful in choosing their sources, or will you once again consider this rude? feel
      2. +2
        9 May 2026 15: 08
        There were similar cases in the British navy, I haven't heard of the Germans, but there were some in the Spanish. Not exactly the same, but there were cases of shoddy workmanship and poor quality. A prime example is the quality of the Titanic's rivets.
        Another example is Captain. Reed warned that changing the original design was unacceptable. However... In Russia, at least obviously flawed designs weren't pushed through.
        As for the "galley slave," we're even trying to use a topic dedicated to more than a century of history to criticize the government. It's certainly not ideal, but a gathering of irresponsible chatterboxes, whatever they're called, seems the worst option. Incidentally, our embezzlers are clearly inferior to the Americans in terms of funds. Let's compare their military budget with ours. And the results of the war with Iran are clear.
  26. +2
    9 May 2026 15: 31
    I still don't understand how you can hit someone on the head with a saber and not kill them. Even if that Japanese policeman had used a ceremonial sword, the wound would have been quite severe. Maybe he used the flat of the blade? As if to say, "Don't make a fuss here!" O_=
    1. +2
      10 May 2026 09: 27
      Quote from bazitron
      I still don’t understand how you can hit someone on the head with a saber and not kill them?

      It's really no surprise if the saber is... crap. The fact is, the outstanding fighting qualities of the samurai and their katanas only became axiomatic thanks to Hollywood productions. feel
      But in general, if you look at the surviving shirt of the Tsarevich and remember that, according to the fashion of the time, at least a frock coat and vest were worn over it... Nikolai was bleeding profusely!
  27. +1
    9 May 2026 22: 36
    Russia might have survived Nicholas II. But the Romanov family proliferated incredibly by the end of the 19th century, and the quality of its members plummeted.
  28. +1
    17 May 2026 19: 10
    Stealing seems to be in our blood))) and under the tsar, the chicken was a real thief(
  29. The comment was deleted.